At this
time, the Court must review the Complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) to determine whether it should be
dismissed as frivolous or malicious, for failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted, or because it seeks
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will
dismiss the Complaint with prejudice for failure to state a
claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(ii).

II.
BACKGROUND

Here,
Plaintiff's Complaint states: “Nov 1 2010 I was
sentence [sic] in Camden County Jail where I was
told to sleep on the floor[.] [T]heir [sic]
wasn't enough space for me[.] [T]heir [sic] were
4 of us to the cell and me being overwait [sic]
trying to fit somewhere was humiluting [sic] and
degrading and embarrassing[, ] not to mention that every time
one [of] the inmate[s] had to urinate I could feel the
splatter. Most of that entire time was sleepless nights
because I just could not get off that floor. [W]hen [I]
complain[ed] to the staff sergeant[, ] he said nothing is
going to change[;] we are overcrowded[.] Oct 31/06
[sic] on the floor again and this time while on the
floor my sneakers 2 sizes small [sic] and I caught
infection[.] [A]nother time my jumpsuit 4X, [and] I needed at
least 8X. [T]hey made me walk around like I had on spandex[.]
[E]verybody including the gaurds [sic] laughed at
[me].” Complaint § III. Plaintiff alleges that he
“suffer[ed] deep emostional [sic] pain being
treated like I was a[n] animal[.] [T]he cell[s] were
deplor-able [sic][.] I [was] force[d] to where
[sic] small fitting sneakes [sic] &
jumpsuite [sic]. Caught so many infections, back
pain[.] I felt less then [sic] human. Nightmares[, ]
arthritis, force[d] to live in a cell with 4 people made for
2.” Id. § IV.

Plaintiff
seeks $4, 000 in damages, along with “help for the
current [inmates, ] a lot of them were just like myself[.]
[T]here [sic] voices were never heard[.] I know I
didn't derseve [sic] to be treating
[sic] that way and they don't either.”
Id. § V.

III.
STANDARD OF REVIEW

28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) requires a court to review
complaints prior to service in cases in which a plaintiff is
proceeding in forma pauperis. Pursuant to §
1915(e)(2), this Court must sua sponte dismiss any
claim that is frivolous, is malicious, fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief
from a defendant who is immune from such relief. This action
is subject to sua sponte screening for dismissal
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is
proceeding in forma pauperis.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Plaintiff
seeks monetary damages from CCJ for allegedly
unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Primarily, the
Complaint must be dismissed as the CCJ is not a &ldquo;state
actor&rdquo; within the meaning of &sect; 1983. See,
e.g., Grabow v. Southern State Corr.
Facility, 726 F.Supp. 537, 538-39 (D.N.J. 1989)
(correctional facility is not a ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.